Cardinal to right of Pope
at Birgitta's right, may be Adam Easton. Lubeck; Ghotan, 1492
editio princeps engraving.

HE manuscripts containing Cardinal Adam Easton 's Defensorium
Sancte Birgittae/ For an account of Adam Easton see Leslie John
MacFarlane, 'The Life and Writings of Adam Easton, O.S.B.',
University of London, Thesis, 1955. The extant manuscripts
seem to be Oxford, Bodleian Library, Hamilton 2; Lincoln
Cathedral Chapter Library A.5.4 (114), now housed at
Nottingham University; Uppsala, University Library C518, C621,
MacFarlane also indicating C519. It was briefly discussed by
W.A. Pantin, 'The Defensorium of Adam Easton', English
Historical Review 51 (1936), 675-80, MacFarlane, pp.
217-34./ also offer a letter
that the Benedictine cardinal wrote to the Abbess and
community in Vadstena, presumably in 1390 to judge by the
incomplete indications in the Lincoln Cathedral Chapter A.5.4
(114) manuscript , 'Scriptum Rome ix die Februarii. Adam
Cardinalis Anglie' /The
manuscript was described in detail by R.M Woolley, Catalogue
of the Manuscripts of Lincoln Cathedral Library (Oxford,
1927), 80-82, and again with great expertise by R.M. Thomson,
Catalogue of the Manuscripts of Lincoln Cathedral Chapter
Library (Cambridge, 1989), 87-89. MacFarlane, 219-20,
also offers a description, but his folio indications are one
less than those given by Thomson. Dating from the fifteenth
century, written in a uniform hybrid hand, the manuscript
consists of 116 folios, numbered 1-115, the first folio not
being counted in the numbering. the first 11 (of 19) items
concern St Birgitta and are mainly conceived to defend the
authenticity of her revelations (see similar compilations in
Oxford, Bodleian Library, Bodley 346, and Balliol College
225). The Brigittine items are: 1. Selected Offices and
Prayers for the Blessed Virgin Mary, fols. 1-4v; 2. Prologus
Magistri Mathie in Librum Celestium Revelationum Beatee
Birgittae, fols. 5v-7v; 3. Alphonsus of Jaen, Epistola
Solitarii ad Reges, chapters 1-7, fols. 7v-17; 4. 'Incipit
epistola uenerabilis uiri fratris Magni Petri generalis
confessoris monasterii Watzentsteen contra calumpniantes
sanctissimas reuelaciones beate Birgitte de regno Swecie olim
diuinitus inspiratas. Ad laudem et honorem et gloriam . . .
Gratia domini nostri Ihesu Cristi sit cum omnibus uobis amen'
(fols. 17-18v); 5. 'Incipit epistola cuiusdam religiosi
ordinis fratrum minorum contra impugnantes sanctissimas
reuelaciones beate Birgitte de regno Swecie oriunde in Romam
et ecclesias inciperet reformare' (fols. 18v-24v); 6. Adam
Easton, Defensorium Beatae Birgittae (fols. 24v-49v); 7.
'Pater amantissime cum reuerencia et correctione uestre
altissime sapiencie et doctrine . . . Et protegat in aduersis
ipsa sapientia Dei patris Amen. Adam Cardinalis' (fols.
49v-50); 8. 'Epistola domini cardinalis Anglie ad abbatissam
et conuentum' (fols. 50-50v); 9. 'Sermo sanctissimi in Cristo
patris domini Bonifatii pape noni pro canonizacione beate
Brigitte habitus atque factus' (fols 50v-54v); 10. Vita Beatae
Birgittae (fols 54v-61v); 11. Offices for Bridget, Visitation,
Crown of Thorns (fols. 62-66)./From
the contents of the letter it is clear that it must predate St
Birgitta's canonization on 7 October 1391, though it cannot
have been written before 1390, as Easton was only restored to
his cardinalate in December 1389 following Pope Urban's
decease, after a lengthy period of imprisonment that began on
11 January 1385, when along with five other cardinals he was
thrust into duress on account of a supposed conspiracy against
the pontiff. Easton was more fortunate than his confreres, as
they apparently all perished in their confinement. Easton
attributed his survival to the intercession of Birgitta, whom
he earnestly hoped to see canonized. His Defensorium
refuted a Perugian Libellus against Birgitta's Revelationes.
Unfortunately, the Defensorium is not dated, but as it
is signed by Easton as Cardinal it is probably that it was
officially presented after his restoration to the purple in
Pope Boniface IX's consistory held on 18 December 1389, though
it may well have been compiled during his imprisonment.

Soon after the death of
Birgitta in Rome on 23 July 1373 her cause for canonization
was urged and as early as May 1376 Pope Gregory XI appointed a
commission to consider the case at the request of the Holy
Roman Emperor, the King, bishops, and nobility of Sweden/Isak Collijn, Acta et processus
canonizacionis Beate Birgitte, Samlingar utgivna av Svenska
Fornskriftsaliskapet, Andra Serien, Latinska Skrifter 1
(Uppsala 1924-31), 4./.

After Pope Gregory XI's
death, Urban VI interested himself in the case, appointing in
a consistory held on 15 December four cardinals/Thomas Frignano (Gradensis); John of Amelia
(Corfiensis), Agapitus of Columpna, and Gentilis de Sangro:
Collijn, Acta, 5; K. Eubel, Hierarchia Catholica
Medii Aevi 1, Munster 1913, 23-24. Agapitus died in 1380
and Thomas Frignano in November, 1381./to examine the evidence collected to date and
to scrutinize their orthodoxy. Probably in 1382 or 1383 three
cardinals were delegated to assess the findings of this
commission, John of Amelia, Lucas Radulfulco de Gentilis /Collijn, Acta , 600; Eubel, Hierarchia,
I.23, lists Lucan Radulfulco (Nucerinus)/ and Adam Easton, who had been elevated to the
purple in December 1381. The selection of Easton may have been
due to the reputation he had gained for his recent Defensorium
Ecclesiastice Potestatis /
James Hogg writes 'There is no evidence that Easton
encountered Birgitta in Rome and the fact that he makes no
allusion to personal acquaintance with the saint is
significant. On the other hand, he almost certainly met her
daughter Katherine, as he gave evidence on 9 March 1379 along
with her and Alphonso Pecha concerning the election of Urban
VI according to Armarium LIV, vol 17, in the Vatican
Archives./.

Though the form of
Birgitta's revelations was certainly unusual, Easton as doctor
of the Holy Scriptures, found the doctrine contained therein
fully consonant with Catholic teaching and vigorously opposed
the anonymous critic from Perugia/The
Perugian cleric, termed 'Adversarius ', appears to have been the cause's Devil's
Advocate, JBH/ , who launched a
frontal attack on the Regula Salvatoris, which had
been presented to Pope Urban V in Rome in October 1367 and
approved, after some procrastination, in an emended form in
1370, receiving further confirmation from Gregory XI in 1375,
before Urban VI formally approved the Brigittine Order and the
rule in his bull of 3 December 1378. The Perugian sceptic
clearly must have been a conservative cleric, who distrusted
mysticism and was duly aggrieved to see a woman founding a
religious order, particularly when she claimed to be following
the immediate directives of Christ, God the Father, and the
Blessed Virgin.

Unfortunately, the
Perugian's Libellus has not been identified, which
makes the dating of Easton's Defensorium hypothetical.
It would, however, seem unlikely that he embarked on such a
work before he was officially connected with Birgitta's cause
and its composition may well be some years later, for Easton
refers to his Defensorium in his letter to the Abbess
and community of Vadstena, mentioning a copy sent to Alphonsus
of Jaen, who had been assiduously promoting Birgitta's cause
and who died on 19 August 1388. The Defensorium may
have been conceived of as a thanksgiving for Birgitta's
intercession for him in 1385, which Easton believed had
preserved him from a worse fate than imprisonment. If this was
the case, it would have been compiled 1385-88 and presented to
Boniface IX after his restitution to the cardinalate in 1391,
- Easton signs it as cardinal, - but before Birgitta's
canonization in 1391. The prologue to the Defensorium,
addressed to Boniface IX, may well have been written after the
text was terminated, for it summarizes the Perugian
theologian's objections to Birgitta's writings, particularly
the Regula Salvatorisand the Sermo
Angelicus, that Easton was to refute in his 41
articles.

Easton, with considerable
breadth of vision for his time, repudiates the Perugian's view
that neither Christ nor even an angel would have deigned to
appear to a woman and dictate a rule, urging that the risen
Christ first showed Himself to a woman after the Resurrection
(Matthew 28) and that angels frequently appeared to the
prophets. that Birgitta was a prophetess could hardly be
disputed in Easton's opinion, as she had foreseen the Great
Schism in Revelationes VI.63 .
Her deep spirituality, her virtues, and the mortified life she
led, - here Easton cites Romans VIII, - ruled out a Satanic or
halucinatory origin for her revelation/ Bodleian Library Hamilton 7, art. 1-2,
folios 229-31. All references are to this manuscript, which
was collated with Lincoln Cathedral Chapter Library 114
(referred to in the notes as L in the following transcript).
The Bodleian manuscripts is briefly described in Falconer
Maden, A Summary Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the
Bodleian Library V (Oxford, 1905), 14-15, and in more
detail in MacFarlane, 218. A paper manuscript of the fifteenth
century, which came to be at Erfurt, but was likely written at
Vadstena, contains 1. Bulla canonizationis beate Birgitte de
regno Swecie (fol. 1); 2. Incipit primus liver revelationum
celestium domine Birgitte (fol. 30); 3. Incipit defensorium S.
Birgitta (fol. 229); 4. Peticio admissionis articulorum (fol.
248), 5, Epistola Adam cardinalis (fol. 248)./.

The Perugian objected to
the inelegant Latin of the texts, unworthy of divine origin,
which led to a reluctance on the part of the Holy See to
approve the Regula Salvatoris.
Easton retaliates by citing St Paul's advice to the Hebrews
and the Corinthians/ Hebrews
5.12-14; 2 Corinthians 10./. Furthermore,
the Rule of St Pachomius can hardly be regarded as a model of
elegance, but it received papal approval, as did the Regula
Salvatoris under Gregory XI and Urban VI / Defensorium, article 7, fol.
231v./.

The Perugian also attacked
the theology of the Regula Salvatoris,
apparently claiming that it stated that God the Father was
incarnate by the Virgin Mary, a misreading that Easton
repudiates / Defensorium,
articles 5-6, fols. 231v./.

Interestingly, Easton
cautiously promotes feministic theological positions in the
late fourteenth century, for he pours scorn on the Perugian's
assertion that women could never be allowed to compile a rule,
as they were prohibited from preaching and exercising public
ecclesiastical functions by Holy Writ, referring the Perugian
to St Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologiae Ia. q. 54,
art. 1, where the Dominican concedes the right to women to
engage in such activities in private which was, according to
him, Birgitta's case/
Defensorium, article 7, fol. 231v./. Easton then lists a number of examples
showing women receiving special revelations from God.

After having disposed of
the Perugian's specific charges, Easton devotes the bulk of
his work to a study of the Regula
Salvatoris , the Sermo Angelicus
, and Birgitta's Orationes , showing
in his analyses, that he had a good knowledge of the Rule of
St Augustine, and those of St Benedict, St Dominic, and St
Francis of Assisi, stressing that, as the Regula
Salvatoris was intended for both men and women, it was
bound to differ in spirit from purely masculine prescriptions
and that the approbation of the Holy See was in itself
sufficient guarantee of its orthodoxy. Objections to the
Brigittine habit were dismissed as trivial/ Defensorium , articles 8-10, fol.
233-233v./.

Easton's remaining 31
aricles seek to justify the Brigittine liturgy as contained in
the Sermo Angelicus, an
office specifically centred on the Blessed Virgin, but which,
as Easton points out, contains in its readings a complete, if
brief, outline of the whole of Christian historical theology
as food for meditation in an enclosed order.

Though Easton is certainly
eloquent in his Defensorium, the Perugian's discussion
of the problem of evil arising from the free-will of the
angels, the then still disputed question of the Immaculate
Conception of the Blessed Virgin, and the role of her
suffering in the divine plan of the Redemption were questions
that occupied the best theological minds for several centuries
to come, whilst her bodily assumption into heaven after her
decease was only defined as a dogma in 1950. Many present-day
biblical scholars would share the Perugian's distaste for the
apocrypha's misguided contributions to an exaggerated
Mariology. Easton seeks to refute the Perugian point by point,
insisting on the magnitude of the angels' sin by misusing
their freedom, citing in support St Augustine (De Genesim
4 and De Civitate 3,9,11,12,13 and 15), St Anselm of
Canterbury, St Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theologiae Ia. q.
61, art 6), Aristotle, St John of Damascus, and the text of
Holy Scripture. In favour of the Immaculate Conception, he
quotes the Tractatus de Conceptione Beatae Virginis Mariae
of Peter Aureola, along with the assertions of St Augustine in
the De Predestinatione Sanctorum and De Trinitate,
as well as St Thomas Aquinas' declaration in Summa
Theologiae IIIa, q. 2, art. 11. He expatiates at length
on the sufferings of the Blessed Virgin, utilising all the
biblical sources together with Bede's commentary on St Luke,
concluding that her assumption and coronation in heaven were
previsaged by Denis the
Areopagite, St
Augustine, Boethius,
St Thomas Aquinas, Nicholas of
Lyra, and even the Hebrew glosses to the biblical texts.
His concluding article depicts his own deep devotion to the
Blessed Virgin.

Easton's Defensorium
is a real tour de force, whereby he successfully demonstrated
that the assertions of the Revelationes are confirmed
by the teachings of the Doctors of the Church at virtually
every point/ Defensorium ,
article 23, fol. 239./.

Consult also the
excellent essay, James Hogg, 'Adam Easton's Defensorium
Sanctae Birgittae', The Medieval Mystical Tradition,
Volume 6, ed. Marion Glasscoe (Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell and
Brewer, 1999), pp. 213-240, and its copious citations. James
Hogg does not discuss the probable relationship between the
Benedictine Cardinal Adam Easton, of Norwich Cathedral Priory of
the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity, and the coeval Anchoress of
Benedictine St Julian's Church, Conisford, Norwich, Dame Julian
of Norwich, who likewise used the Hebrew Scriptures, the Greek
Testament, Pseudo-Dionysius, Augustine, John of Salisbury,
Birgitta of Sweden, and John Wyclif, in writing the Showing
of Love in Middle English. That relstionship became the
subject of two of my books, one of which he published: